ML20213G405

From kanterella
Revision as of 00:40, 20 January 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comments Opposing Proposed Rules Re Reduction of Evacuation Zone from 10 to 1 Mile & Elimination of State Approval of Evacuation Plans.Expresses Disgust Re NRC Lack of Concern for Welfare of People
ML20213G405
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/09/1987
From: Jorgensen R, Jorgenson L
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20213G395 List:
References
OL-1, NUDOCS 8705180271
Download: ML20213G405 (1)


Text

_- -_ _ ____ --__ . _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

< b .

g}(y($i Lesley and Raymond Jorgenson RR 1 Box 270 Ossioee, NR 03964 \

\ \

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street NV Washington, DC 20555

Dear Sir,

I am writing concerntng the Seabrook Nisclear Plant. My husband and I and our family strongly ocoose any attempt to reduce the evacuation zone from 10 miles to 1 mile.

We also object to your orocomed rule change that would eliminate state soproval of evacuation olans. And we feel that the allegations of construction faults and the well-documented drug and alcohol abuse by construction workers mandate an immediate, ind eoend ent, unbiased investigation of the seabrook olant.

We are disgusted by your lack of concern for the welfare of the people which is supposed to be your prime concern. The plant should never have been allowed to be constructed in that area.

We have been at the beach in the summer and we know how congested that area becomes during those months. We also know that there are other possibilities for electric nower within the state as does PSNH who has been blatantly buying up other smal11 producers and letting them sit in order to fabticate a greater demand for Seabrook power.

Sincerely, V 7}Y""

8705180271 870409 .

PDR ADOCK 05000443  !

F PDR l

1 l

,